East round 1: New York @ Sweden
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> All-Time League This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
postandpivot
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:15 am    Post subject:

TIME wrote:
postandpivot marches to the beat of his own special drum.

that may be the case. again, remember when 99.9% of LG was marching to the same beat a few years ago. and even during the summer of the kobe tirade. everyone was marching to kobe's drum. kobe had to admit, "i'm glad i wasn't the gm". all the while, i was marching to the beat of my own special drum who was right? the masses(laker fans)? NOPE kobe? NOPE. Mitch and a handful of lgers/laker fans who looked deeper then the surface were the ones who came out correct in the end.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sky
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:31 am    Post subject:

If Pivot can prove deeper and teach us something new or see the game in a different way that's all for the good. Give him his chance to do that this weekend.

One thing that does seem misunderstood though. Pivot you seem to think you lost due to competing philosophy, the judges and coaches not seeing deeper, lost in a circle jerk of marching to the same drummer. I don't think that's the case. Philosophically I agree with what you said. You lost my vote because you never mentioned a specific zone, never mentioned a specific transition defense scheme, never mentioned an adjustment for a Moses double. That's not a philosophical split at all.

If you had done those things I guarantee you would have won my vote. You had the better team execution on offense, better balance, more consistent scoring options. All you needed was a zone optimizing your talent, a transition D scheme and a Moses double adjustment and game over. None of those things have anything to do with philosophy.


Last edited by Sky on Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
hsenation
Sixth Man
Sixth Man


Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 49

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:31 am    Post subject:

Pivot...

One last thing...Let me save you some time on your next million posts. Just copy and paste this, cause it summarizes everything that you keep saying on your posts:

I'm right and you are wrong.

That is all I hear. Even your veiled way of saying it, "look deeper" is really saying, "look deeper, you idiot, you are wrong."

I would respect you more if you did say it that way. At least, we wouldn't be sidetracked with these empty arguments you keep making. Just say it with me...

I'm right and you are wrong.

See how easy that is. Now please reply in that snappy way that you do...but if you could, pretty please, just summarize it like this. It would save me a bunch of reading, that to be honest I probably would skim over anyway, so get your REAL point across and say it...

I'm right and you are wrong.

there...doesn't that feel better?
_________________
There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
postandpivot
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:52 am    Post subject:

hsenation wrote:
Pivot...

One last thing...Let me save you some time on your next million posts. Just copy and paste this, cause it summarizes everything that you keep saying on your posts:

I'm right and you are wrong.

That is all I hear. Even your veiled way of saying it, "look deeper" is really saying, "look deeper, you idiot, you are wrong."

I would respect you more if you did say it that way. At least, we wouldn't be sidetracked with these empty arguments you keep making. Just say it with me...

I'm right and you are wrong.

See how easy that is. Now please reply in that snappy way that you do...but if you could, pretty please, just summarize it like this. It would save me a bunch of reading, that to be honest I probably would skim over anyway, so get your REAL point across and say it...

I'm right and you are wrong.

there...doesn't that feel better?



Quote:
It would save me a bunch of reading, that to be honest I probably would skim over anyway, so get your REAL point across and say it...


You just told on yourself. and thats exactly my point. stop skimming.

when i said 1.75+1.75= 3.50 and you say it equals 4. thats skimming. thats getting the meat and potatoes out of it. but where are the veggies. look deeper=veggies. if i thought you guys were WAY OFF base in your arguments. I would've said, "hey fellas, thanks for the chance to play." and i would've left it at that. there's no convincing someone that is totally clueless. to pull that all you would not be convincing them, you woud be teaching them from scratch. and thats not what is happening here. you guys know your stuff. BUT. yes there's a BUT. But you dont look deep enough. if you want to refuse to understand what that means and you want to label it as me saying I know it all and you know nothing. Thats your choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
postandpivot
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:53 am    Post subject:

anyway, whats the 2nd rd looking like?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
hsenation
Sixth Man
Sixth Man


Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 49

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:17 am    Post subject:

My choice is you think you're right and you think we are wrong. And when I say we, I mean everyone who has tried to rebut you, but have been summarily ignored.

You are only willing to listen to one person's opinion, yours. The judges had an opinion which you don't accept, so you tell them, "you need to look deeper." What are you trying to say? You're saying, "look deeper, you missed something." Now, is this supposed to be constructive criticism or are you trying to make a point that they made the wrong decision? Based on all of the posts you've made, it appears to me, and others may disagree, that you are telling them they made the wrong decision. Your example of "looking deeper" at the Kobe situation sounds more like "I told you so, I was right" than as an example of actually assessing the situation.

And perhaps that is the point. If you are honestly trying to get people to look beyond the surface of things, then think of how you communicate it. You continuously make these statements, expect everyone to follow what you're saying, and yet you ignore what anyone else has had to say. Sky has been VERY accomodating in explaining to you his thinking, and yet, he still needs to dig DEEPER? No, he needed to be a mind reader, because, of course, you don't take any blame for the lack of a gameplan.

Don't hide behind your fake "look deeper" statement. If you actually had a reasonable point, it would have been OBVIOUS and everyone would agree with you. Again, you put the responsibility on everyone else, when you should be the one explaining yourself. "Look deeper" and "oh yeah? prove me wrong" are the same thing - they are lame ways of justifying your statements WITHOUT justifying them.

I think I've said enough, please continue your discussion on the use of the gold standard and its effect on international currency...and have another drink...
_________________
There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
L4L
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 140

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:18 pm    Post subject:

Please tell me where I wasn't looking deep enough when I voted against you...

postandpivot wrote:

not all about any names, but names vs hated names in my case. like i said, i knew i was in for a doozy when i picked pierce, webber, and jones. those 3 are gifts and curses all at once (perception wise). the fact that peopel didn't get the fact that dennis rodman scoring 8 pts vs pauls 20+ and the fact that paul would've been able to hang out and double/sit in passing lanes, and just play free safety all game when rodman was in was missed.

First of all, Sky RULED IN YOUR FAVOR ON PIERCE. Okay, because it is new school, Rodman has to play off to some degree to stay in front of Pierce. We can all agree to that. What we can’t agree to is the fact that Pierce would mercilessly light him up all night. Pierce would get jumpers. Contested ones. When he drove, which would be rare against a great defender in Dennis who is already playing off, he’d be driving into Sheed and Camby. That is going to reduce his numbers. Remember, you’re trumpeting his Finals MVP as a breaking point here, but Pierce got that Finals MVP on 20ish ppg and 45% shooting. What happens when you put legitimate shot blockers back there and people who can do a decent job against him? His numbers go down. No matter how bad you think Rodman is going to get burned, he’s a better defender than Vlad and Luke. Period. With those shot-blockers back there, Pierce is taking more jumpers. Period. His points are going down and so is his FG%. Period. So no, Pierce is not getting 20+ on good efficiency. He’s either getting 14-18 on solid efficiency levels, or he’s getting higher than 20 on a jump shot brigade. I tend to think the latter would happen because of the way you want to use him in your game plan. Pierce is a career 44% shooter and 46% in the year you picked. In the playoffs, he was 44%. You say he’s going to light up Rodman, but, check the numbers or even watch his shooting form, Pierce is a streaky jump shooter and you’re plan calls for him to shoot jumpers until Dennis moves up. Dennis isn’t moving up. If Pierce wants to shoot jumpers at a moderate efficiency clip instead of post touches to Malone and Webber… then Magic is RUNNING MORE and Dennis still ain’t moving up.

With all those jumpers, there are going to be LONG defensive rebounds. Guess which team is getting to those? Perhaps the superior rebounding team? Rodman grabbed 18 rebound a game at SF for Detroit. Now add in Camby and Sheed… They are getting the defensive boards which WILL BE LONG. What does that mean? Magic is OFF, OFF, OFFFFFF to theeeeeeeee RACES! With Magic hitting them in transition, guys like Camby and Dennis who are GAZELLES are running your more grounded front-court players into the ground. Pierce is a great offensive weapon, but he’s pudgy. Imagine him running all day… Now imagine Moses running all day… Webber can keep up, but he’s the only one. Because of the rebounding of Sweden, and YOUR lack of transition D scheme, Sweden gets to play its running game all day. If you have a transition D scheme, this can be slowed to a great degree, BUT you DON’T. The judges don’t make one for you. So again, what happens, Magic is OFF, OFF, OFFFF… You get the point.

Quote:
i could see that in those arguments about dennis vs paulina in that other thread. remember that thread was made before we all knew we had to place judgement on other teams. i saw the mentality of what people thought would happen. and how they made an attempt to write off the fact that he chose the wrong era with his lineup vs my lineup. that right there signed his pizza(if you know what i mean) . but no one aside from myself could see that. that was amazing to me.

The disadvantage of Dennis on Pierce is MORE, MORE than made up by the fact they could zone down onto Moses effectively double teaming him. So yes, he loses a bit on Dennis defensively, but not to the degree you suggested (see my Finals comparison above). Now, it is your turn to acknowledge the BENEFIT of getting to zone down on Moses. You could have countered this too and made his choice a worse one, but, again, you didn’t. As judges have already told you, this was KEY.

Quote:
you have to double our Center, and as we both stated webber is doing damage from the high post in. lets forget eddie is WIDE open(since you want to pack it in). forget Gp can still push it and wasn't going to try to post up in that zone for the most part(which was stated) but will drive and dish a bit). lets forget those 2. thats his defense being compromised.

Again… You… didn’t… provide… a…plan…if…Moses…was…doubled. Secondly, expecting Moses to make perfect passes out of the post on each double is ludicrous because he has a HORRIBLE AST:TO ratio and every defender on Sweden is incredibly long and good at getting in the passing lanes. The blame goes to you on this one for NO Moses double-team contingency! Like I said above, this was KEY.

Quote:
if moses doesn't have to use much energy on defense except for boxing a guy out because camby is not going to hit him for 20 pts. he's energized to kill on the glass(which you stated a bit early), and also to fight thru the double teams from time to time(which you stated a bit early in the game).

Sweden is playing a zone. Boxing out Camby is easier said then done. Moses has to locate him and then put a body on him. Remember, Rodman, Camby, and Sheed are ALL agile and Rodman/Camby go TO the ball to rebound which is perfect for a zone. They move their feet for rebounds instead of positioning their body. Moses is a body rebounder. Sweden is playing a zone. That takes away from his rebounding strength. Yes, he does have more energy to fight through some double teams, BUT he is going to expend PLENTY of energy chasing Camby down the court all night, who is FAST for a center, because you have instructed guys to take jumpers (Webber high post, Pierce from the wing with Rodman backed up, etc) and yet provided no transition D which means Magic has a field day and takes guys like Dennis and Camby who are usually not very useful offensively and makes them threats. If you provide a Moses double-team plan, and transition D scheme, guess what, these concerns are out the window, but you didn’t. This has nothing to do with people not looking deeper. Sure, the judges could have MADE game plans for you for these situations by “looking deeper” and doing your work for you, but that is not the nature of the game. Now you know that.

Quote:
aside from magic and tmac(who is not going to be nearly as lethal playing off the ball even with the magical man setting people up). who else is a true to life scorer int he paint when you need buckets? NO ONE. if magic is in the post. its the wrong era(which i stated), he wont have to be hard doubled which would open up passes for him. a guy would sit in the paint and wait for him to turn then double. no room for cutters to cut.

Sheed can step outside that creates room in the post for cutters first of all… Second of all, even with new school, a player MUST be guarding a man or it is illegal D and a technical. They didn’t abolish 3 in the key yet either… Finally, yeah only two guys who can post when it is those two guys who both have TREMENDOUS height and weight advantages in the post (Payton and Eddie Jones).

Quote:
and pierce is sittign in that lane daring dennis to catch and shoot(which was stated).

Not sure what makes you think that with guys like Camby and Sheed who can both step out that Dennis wouldn’t be playing near the hoop or wouldn’t have room to roll to it / back-door in the case of some overplays. When he’s closer to the hoop he demands SOME level of respect even as inept as he is offensively.

Quote:
their offense as crazy as it sounds(even with magic running it) would freeze up a lot, and it would turn into a jumpshooting competition. sheed(who would be kg like money), camby who would hit a few, tmac who would hit some big 3's from time to time(again remember i'm not leaving him wide open like i am dennis(this was stated). So do you really think they could shoot and make enough jumpers with their bigs to win? if you did a probability equation the answer would be less then 50% of the time. jumpers from your bigs that often =tough loses every time when said team is playing vs a team that they are not better then even on paper.

No. I don’t. That said, I do think, because of your lack of transition D, no double plan for Moses, a lot of jumpers are being taken on both sides which favors the team who can RUN and get easy scores. I agree with this section (not a lot of freeze-ups but enough to have a decisive type of impact in this game), but because of some of the things you left out, Magic is running all day making up for what is, comparatively, a WORSE half-court offense than yours.

Quote:
you cant rely on just a zone when you have liabilities like magic and tmac at the top length or no length. neither one of them are defenders. and yes vs quicker guys they're also liabilities.

And you can’t just rely on saying it won’t work… You need to OUTLINE the offense. Sky said it himself, “If you don’t coach. You don’t win”. This isn’t about breaking down each head to head match-up. We all agree that basketball isn’t 5 games of one on one. Players don’t know the best strategies by themselves that is why each team has a coach. Either put the plan in place or it doesn’t exist. It’s that simple.

Quote:
So lock down perimeter defenders that can sit in a zone for resting purposes and to make his team jumpshooters(which i stated). but can also play man (which i stated). and can sag completely off of one perimeter guy (SF rodman). it means you have great defense vs adequate defense. you have good(at minimum) offense vs lets say good offense.

well if my math is correct. great de + good O trumps adequate de + good o.

I disagree, with the way both plans are set up, you allow an offense that would have been mediocre or good at best depending whether or not the big man jumpers go down to be good to great because Magic is running all day, they are snatching up boards, and Magic is making guys like Rodman and Camby matter while tiring out your front court in transition. Defensively, you didn’t give a specific plan of attack on how to dismantle the zone. Offensively, you had a team which he simply could not guard because there was NO answer for Moses. It was clear to see he had to double, but you didn’t include a specific plan to take apart the double team and the double team out of the zone. If you did that, I agree that you should have won the series. However, you didn’t.

If this game comes down to the clutch, one team has Magic and the other is relying on Eddie Jones, Paul Pierce, and Webber to take jumpers off of Moses Malone double teams. Outside of Pierce, Webber and Eddie simply didn't get it done. Eddie was anti-clutch and Webber DID lose when he had the better team. Magic is the man and the 5 time champ. He closes it out.

I’m not like everyone else who is being politically correct about this. The reason you lost is entirely YOUR FAULT. You lost because you didn’t plan correctly (I can say the same and it sucks, but you don’t see me whining). You had the talent to win, but you didn’t do enough coaching. You, instead, focused on breaking down head to head match-ups like this was streetball (not to say that was the only thing you talked about, don’t take it that way).

Look, it is this simple… If you would have coached better, you would have won. Lots of people can say that through their years of involvement in this game. You haven’t been cheated by anyone but yourself.

Please get over it and let everyone return to enjoying this game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jamas33
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jun 2001
Posts: 3369
Location: Lake Minnetonka

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:26 pm    Post subject:

Nelson from the Simpson's says..HA HA!!!
_________________
Want Some Pancakes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
jamas33
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jun 2001
Posts: 3369
Location: Lake Minnetonka

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:03 pm    Post subject:

FO FO FO
_________________
Want Some Pancakes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
machine24
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 331

PostPosted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:20 pm    Post subject:

come on pivot its just a game! this not real life everyone played just to have fun
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chef Green
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:20 am    Post subject:

I'm a little confused why this discussion is even going on still. The judges ruled, you lost. Game over. No point in trying to convince anyone now. Hell, I had some seriously issues with how the judges ruled against me - some things I really thought they got wrong in the writeups of my team, things they basically missed that I thought were obvious.

But what's the point of bringing them up now? Point is, if I had addressed those issues in my write up, I would have won. But I didn't. So I lost.

Sort of like why you lost, PnP. We blew it on the write ups. Don't blame the judges for your own lack of foresight.
_________________
I play with knives and fire.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
postandpivot
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:24 am    Post subject:

Chef Green wrote:
I'm a little confused why this discussion is even going on still. The judges ruled, you lost. Game over. No point in trying to convince anyone now. Hell, I had some seriously issues with how the judges ruled against me - some things I really thought they got wrong in the writeups of my team, things they basically missed that I thought were obvious.

But what's the point of bringing them up now? Point is, if I had addressed those issues in my write up, I would have won. But I didn't. So I lost.

Sort of like why you lost, PnP. We blew it on the write ups. Don't blame the judges for your own lack of foresight.

perhaps you blew it on the writeups. i didn't blow it on the writeups. everything i mentioned in here after the fact, i pinpointed to how i mentioned it in the writeups. of course some things will be assumed on both teams just looking at the personnel. and the idea that magic and camp would be snagging up boards and running is a false thought. how is that happening if their best rebounder is 20 something odd feet away from the basket trying to lock down a guy that can kill him from 3 land. thats my point. are you rebounding or locking someone down. you can't be a superior boarder and be a superior lockdown defender (in this era) guarding a finals mvp that can do it all. something has to give. if you board that means pierce better be leaning towards 30pts. and if magic is going down to board it means he isn't guarding gp as tight either on the perimeter. which leaves him open to shoot and drive, you can't back up that far off of GP and not expect him to start driving and setting people up(in the writeup) in addition to hitting a few 3s(not a lot). you can't sit in a zone an expect to get all the boards either. it has to be some type of hybrid man zone and who you pick to leave open is the key. you can't leave anyone open on my team on the perimeter. gp will still penetrate if you do, eddie will light you up if he's just hanging out alone. perice will either light you up from afar, step in hit hte mid range or drive, webber can light you up from 18 feet in, and drive and dish(all in the writeup). you can't sag in, and double moses and lock up pierce, and slow down gary, and assume eddie will miss his shots, and assume webber being left alone wont tear your team apart.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TIME
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 278

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:43 am    Post subject:

No need to go into all the detail postandpivot. All we needed to know you already opened our eyes to see earlier in the thread when you identified all five of your starters as unguardable by Sweden. It's obvious now that you should have blown jamas out of the arena. Blind judges.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sky
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:56 am    Post subject:

Was a specific zone mentioned in your writeup? No.

Magic and co are running off made baskets not just boards.

Moses has to get the ball out of a hard double with long armed defenders effectively with defenders denying his release valves. As I said in the writeup, sometimes he suceeds, sometimes he turns it over, most of the time it's lobbed or deflected ob. Wilt carves a defense to pieces in that scenario. Moses not so much.

You assume Moses passes out of it effectively. You assume all running is off rebounds. You assume you play a zone but never name one making it impossible for me to assign you one. UCLA high low on offense. Great there's something I can use. On defense? They man, they zone. No specifics. And that is why you lost. You had the better team but you handcuffed me on defense, gave me nothing to worth with strategically.

On offense you did and you succeeded, on defense you didn't. And now it seems you want to say, well assume a zone for me, assume a transition D scheme for me. No you have to provide that, you didn't and it's precisely why you lost.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
L4L
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 140

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:17 pm    Post subject:

postandpivot wrote:

perhaps you blew it on the writeups. i didn't blow it on the writeups.

Yes, you did.

Quote:
everything i mentioned in here after the fact, i pinpointed to how i mentioned it in the writeups.

SOME of things you claim to have mentioned: A) weren't entirely true, or B) weren't mentioned.

Quote:

of course some things will be assumed on both teams just looking at the personnel.

Like your ALL defensive sets and schemes? That's too big of an assumption man.

Quote:
and the idea that magic and camp would be snagging up boards and running is a false thought.

First of all, no it really isn't. Magic is a great rebounder in an any era and Payton is not slowing him down on the boards. We can all agree to that. As big as Malone was, Sweden is playing a zone. This makes it infinitely harder to specifically box out one person. Camby is quicker to the ball and better rebounding out of his area than Moses Malone. Camby has had four straight years in Denver of over 30% of defensive rebounds grabbed something that Malone never did once. I don't want to hear about the rebounders Camby plays next to either because he's spent time next to Martin, Melo, Reggie Evans, Elson, Nene, and the list goes on.

Quote:
how is that happening if their best rebounder is 20 something odd feet away from the basket trying to lock down a guy that can kill him from 3 land.

You act as if Pierce needs a body glued to him at all times. He's not THAT good from 3. Dennis can play off when the ball is away from Pierce and recover once Pierce is one pass away. Once Dennis see's the shot attempt, he crashes the glass for boards. It isn't that complicated. How do you think he was grabbing double-digit rebounds every night in his SF days in Detroit?

Quote:
thats my point. are you rebounding or locking someone down. you can't be a superior boarder and be a superior lockdown defender (in this era) guarding a finals mvp that can do it all.

Yes, you can play defense and still rebound even at the SF position. Ask Scottie Pippen.

Quote:
something has to give. if you board that means pierce better be leaning towards 30pts.

What are you talking about? You act is if Rodman needs to be within 4ft of the hoop at all times to rebound. That is absolutely false. LeBron James, a far worse rebounder than Dennis, spends plenty of time defensively at SF and it doesn't hinder him from grabbing 7-8 rebounds a game. Even at SF, Dennis can still rack up double-digit rebounds and he isn't spending the whole night there per Sweden's gameplan. He does get time at the 4.

Quote:
and if magic is going down to board it means he isn't guarding gp as tight either on the perimeter.

Magic doesn't have to go down to board before the shot is in the air... He will also grab the long rebounds that are coming out from the fact you're team is shooting a ton of jumpers. More importantly here, Magic is a zone. This isn't man defense. He's not supposed to be playing him tight until he is one pass away.

Quote:

you can't sit in a zone an expect to get all the boards either.

He doesn't have to get all the boards just the majority to fuel Magic's running game. The only position New York has a rebounding advantage at is PF. Sweden dominates PG, SG, and SF rebounding and has, at worst, equality at the C position.

Quote:

gp will still penetrate if you do, eddie will light you up if he's just hanging out alone. perice will either light you up from afar, step in hit hte mid range or drive, webber can light you up from 18 feet in, and drive and dish(all in the writeup). you can't sag in, and double moses and lock up pierce, and slow down gary, and assume eddie will miss his shots, and assume webber being left alone wont tear your team apart.

You're still assuming Moses gets the ball out every time. How does a guy with almost a 3 turnover per 1 assist ratio do that against the length of Sweden?

While all of those guys are good jump shooters (minus Payton), the only looks the team is getting are jump shots. None of those guys are .400 3P%+ guys with beautiful, perfect form and a great set shot. No, Jones and Pierce are guys that will make you pay, but they will not dominate a game from the outside. There are going to be more misses than makes. Sweden gets more of those misses than does New York.

Payton: .328 3P%
Jones: .375 3P%
Pierce: .392 3P%
Webber (2002-2003): 39.8 eFG% on jumpers -- good enough to make you pay, but that's not going to dominate a game

And yes the rotations would cut off at Payton and you're right he would repenetrate, but he's driving into Camby and Sheed who are both anchors in their own right and in this case they are paired up. As far as Gary setting people up, yes, he will get some assists in this manner, but Payton is a score-first guard and you're overrating his playmaking abilities. Payton was known to be a bit selfish at times.

But really, the bottom line is that you didn't provide much on the defensive end of coaching and you didn't have a contingency plan for continued Moses double teams.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
postandpivot
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:17 pm    Post subject:

L4L wrote:
postandpivot wrote:

perhaps you blew it on the writeups. i didn't blow it on the writeups.

Yes, you did.

Quote:
everything i mentioned in here after the fact, i pinpointed to how i mentioned it in the writeups.

SOME of things you claim to have mentioned: A) weren't entirely true, or B) weren't mentioned.

Quote:

of course some things will be assumed on both teams just looking at the personnel.

Like your ALL defensive sets and schemes? That's too big of an assumption man.

Quote:
and the idea that magic and camp would be snagging up boards and running is a false thought.

First of all, no it really isn't. Magic is a great rebounder in an any era and Payton is not slowing him down on the boards. We can all agree to that. As big as Malone was, Sweden is playing a zone. This makes it infinitely harder to specifically box out one person. Camby is quicker to the ball and better rebounding out of his area than Moses Malone. Camby has had four straight years in Denver of over 30% of defensive rebounds grabbed something that Malone never did once. I don't want to hear about the rebounders Camby plays next to either because he's spent time next to Martin, Melo, Reggie Evans, Elson, Nene, and the list goes on.

Quote:
how is that happening if their best rebounder is 20 something odd feet away from the basket trying to lock down a guy that can kill him from 3 land.

You act as if Pierce needs a body glued to him at all times. He's not THAT good from 3. Dennis can play off when the ball is away from Pierce and recover once Pierce is one pass away. Once Dennis see's the shot attempt, he crashes the glass for boards. It isn't that complicated. How do you think he was grabbing double-digit rebounds every night in his SF days in Detroit?

Quote:
thats my point. are you rebounding or locking someone down. you can't be a superior boarder and be a superior lockdown defender (in this era) guarding a finals mvp that can do it all.

Yes, you can play defense and still rebound even at the SF position. Ask Scottie Pippen.

Quote:
something has to give. if you board that means pierce better be leaning towards 30pts.

What are you talking about? You act is if Rodman needs to be within 4ft of the hoop at all times to rebound. That is absolutely false. LeBron James, a far worse rebounder than Dennis, spends plenty of time defensively at SF and it doesn't hinder him from grabbing 7-8 rebounds a game. Even at SF, Dennis can still rack up double-digit rebounds and he isn't spending the whole night there per Sweden's gameplan. He does get time at the 4.

Quote:
and if magic is going down to board it means he isn't guarding gp as tight either on the perimeter.

Magic doesn't have to go down to board before the shot is in the air... He will also grab the long rebounds that are coming out from the fact you're team is shooting a ton of jumpers. More importantly here, Magic is a zone. This isn't man defense. He's not supposed to be playing him tight until he is one pass away.

Quote:

you can't sit in a zone an expect to get all the boards either.

He doesn't have to get all the boards just the majority to fuel Magic's running game. The only position New York has a rebounding advantage at is PF. Sweden dominates PG, SG, and SF rebounding and has, at worst, equality at the C position.

Quote:

gp will still penetrate if you do, eddie will light you up if he's just hanging out alone. perice will either light you up from afar, step in hit hte mid range or drive, webber can light you up from 18 feet in, and drive and dish(all in the writeup). you can't sag in, and double moses and lock up pierce, and slow down gary, and assume eddie will miss his shots, and assume webber being left alone wont tear your team apart.

You're still assuming Moses gets the ball out every time. How does a guy with almost a 3 turnover per 1 assist ratio do that against the length of Sweden?

While all of those guys are good jump shooters (minus Payton), the only looks the team is getting are jump shots. None of those guys are .400 3P%+ guys with beautiful, perfect form and a great set shot. No, Jones and Pierce are guys that will make you pay, but they will not dominate a game from the outside. There are going to be more misses than makes. Sweden gets more of those misses than does New York.

Payton: .328 3P%
Jones: .375 3P%
Pierce: .392 3P%
Webber (2002-2003): 39.8 eFG% on jumpers -- good enough to make you pay, but that's not going to dominate a game

And yes the rotations would cut off at Payton and you're right he would repenetrate, but he's driving into Camby and Sheed who are both anchors in their own right and in this case they are paired up. As far as Gary setting people up, yes, he will get some assists in this manner, but Payton is a score-first guard and you're overrating his playmaking abilities. Payton was known to be a bit selfish at times.

But really, the bottom line is that you didn't provide much on the defensive end of coaching and you didn't have a contingency plan for continued Moses double teams.

who said webber would shoot only jumpers? not me. that was one thing he could do to make his man come out. but he could also penetrate from that close, thats a two step dribble drive and layup/dunk or dish.

and you know whats really funny. some of you are the same guys that say LO needs to go because he can't shoot 3's well enough. and I said how thats true but if he's placed close enough he can take a few steps then turn into a playmaker for himself or others. everyone said, NO we need a chucker. well Cwebb, eddie jones, paul pierce are all good enough chuckers to take care of a zone but they are also good and penetrating with or without the ball. now, why is it not possible for us to beat a zone with jumpshooting (since thats what people think the lakers need at the sf spot vs a boston like lockdown zone(which his team was not, but lets say it was for arguments sake). strike 1 and 2. but strike 3 comes in with the fact that i didn't say we would beat that zone with jumpshooting only. read above. sorry, It was the worse move by the winner to choose the new era of zone coverage vs my team. we excel in that environment and i explained why well enough. so how do you come away with a different opinion? people think different about different players no matter what the writeups say. cause sometimes people can put stuff in writeups that isn't correct per the player said poster my be speaking of. like if i said GP would kill you from the 3. thats not true for the most part. but i never said anything that was untrue about any of my guys. So it means that we have different opinions about those players. we see them in a different light. it means 1. you guys dont believe paulina is as good as I think he is. same goes for eddie and webber and gary (offensively).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
L4L
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 140

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:44 pm    Post subject:

postandpivot wrote:

who said webber would shoot only jumpers? not me. that was one thing he could do to make his man come out. but he could also penetrate from that close, thats a two step dribble drive and layup/dunk or dish.

Right. You didn't say anything on the issue. Chris Webber one on one off the bounce against Sheed with Camby helpside? Against the zone, he's taking jumpers until they are out of it.

Quote:
well Cwebb, eddie jones, paul pierce are all good enough chuckers to take care of a zone but they are also good and penetrating with or without the ball. now, why is it not possible for us to beat a zone with jumpshooting (since thats what people think the lakers need at the sf spot vs a boston like lockdown zone(which his team was not, but lets say it was for arguments sake). strike 1 and 2. but strike 3 comes in with the fact that i didn't say we would beat that zone with jumpshooting only.

Right, you didn't say anything specific about the zone besides talking about a few abilities that the New York players possessed. Without a strategy against the zone, what ensues is pure jump shooting. Without a game plan, what happens when a player is double teamed, you expect the open man to take the shot. Nowhere in your game plan does it say, New York will go with a high/low attack to counter the zone to get quality shots against the zone. With no zone offense, all you're getting is jumpers. Will it be enough to beat the zone? It might, but it's not guarantee and with that many jumpers there ARE going to be rebounds available and New York isn't going to win the rebounding battle.

And that... Is my point.

Quote:
read above. sorry, It was the worse move by the winner to choose the new era of zone coverage vs my team. we excel in that environment and i explained why well enough. so how do you come away with a different opinion? people think different about different players no matter what the writeups say. cause sometimes people can put stuff in writeups that isn't correct per the player said poster my be speaking of. like if i said GP would kill you from the 3. thats not true for the most part. but i never said anything that was untrue about any of my guys. So it means that we have different opinions about those players. we see them in a different light. it means 1. you guys dont believe paulina is as good as I think he is. same goes for eddie and webber and gary (offensively).

You're absolutely right. You think you're outside shooters and Webber are much better than I do. You talk about Pierce as a guy "who will kill you from the outside". While he's a good sometimes great 3-point shooter, he's .392 3P% in Boston this year despite almost every single one of those opportunities in catch and shoot (88% 3s assisted last year for PP). There is zero reason to believe he even matches that number against Dennis who can at least contest threes even when playing off of Pierce (36% in the playoffs on 3s for Pierce). Eddie Jones in the year selected is .375 3P% which is respectable but it isn't killing anyone (34.6% in the playoffs that year). In my opinion, these guys taking 3s is preferable to Moses Malone in the post and favors Sweden because of the long boards leading to Magic running. As you said Gary isn't hitting 3s. Again, in my opinion, you are overrating your starting shooters big time.

So yes, you can beat the zone with jump shots SOMETIMES, but without a specific zone attack laid out, that is pretty much all you are getting. Jumpers. And, again, you're overrating your team's jump shooting ability. No game plan to pick at holes in the zone = 90% jumpers off of a double team. You talk about guys repenetrating, but the guys you have repenetrating first have to actually: A) receive the kickout from Moses (which is established as not even close to 100% of the time), B) Fake the defender and repenetrate, and C) finish over Camby AND Sheed.

These guys taking long jumpers is better than Moses in the post who Sweden simply can't guard. These guys taking long jumpers feeds into Sweden's game. UCLA O has multiple options to attack the zone but you didn't mention any of them.

In the end, yes, we don't see some of the players the same way, but the more pertinent issues at hand have everything to do with your gameplan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
postandpivot
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 36822

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:49 pm    Post subject:

TIME wrote:
No need to go into all the detail postandpivot. All we needed to know you already opened our eyes to see earlier in the thread when you identified all five of your starters as unguardable by Sweden. It's obvious now that you should have blown jamas out of the arena. Blind judges.

well the truth is, because he chose that era. name one guy that could guard the other guy 1 on 1 in this new DONT TOUCH ERA?

Camby can't guard moses, thats why the double was a must

that leaves someone open? WHO? eddie, paulina, Gp, Cwebb(probably, because you want to have the help of a big, but it could be tmac or dennis the menace. but if you use either of those two, your eye will be dotted.

Jones: .375 3P%
Pierce: .392 3P%

Glen Rice shot .367 from 3 during our first ship with snaqs and kobe. if that was enough to make double teams pay. how on earth 2 guys shooting over that isn't? doesn't add up fellas.

let me show you guys something. look at paulina's 3pt numbers in the playoffs. they went down from during the season above. why? because he saw more man to man coverage then zone. because there was no one they had to double team in the low post(KG is a mid range killer, but not a low post beast, he could be but he isn't).

what would happen if pierce played with snaqs in his hay day? his 3pt% would sky rocket. we all know why. its the same here with moses. no moses aint shaq. BUT, if you're doubling moses like you say you are, then moses is shaq to you.
it means jones, pierce are wide open, it means cwebb is open. thats to many guys open. which means no no one on that team can defend anyone, because you're chosing not to. in addition, magic, tmac are not defenders. not saying eddie jones is some kobe bryant, but he doesn't have to be. tmac is not going to play him tough defensively. even with his length. how often have you seen tmac in his career use his length like prince on defense? NEVER probably.

so the idea of length on defense is irrelevant if its not use correctly.

and thats another assumption i saw that was totally incorrect. remember some of you guys are the same people who swear that LO's length isn't enough to get it done on defense with two legit Bigmen (gasol and bynum both footers officialy).
on offense to assume magic is running like an olympic relay is a bit much. magic ran with the purple and gold. but did he run ALL THE TIME? NO. he ran less then half the time. so what was he doing the rest of the time? posting people up, pick n roll(which you mentioned both), hitting guys off the cut. here's the problem. there was no team that was remotely this tough defensively that magic ever saw on the perimeter. eddie jones who is a passing lane menace as well as a solid on the ball defender, and gary who is an on the ball THief as well as a passing lane / thief. you can't post up gp if you've allowed us to run zone. thats why i wasn't talking about gp doing any real posting up on magic. not that he couldn't gp could post up anyone in the nba including centers from time to time, I've seen it . but in a zone i would not have him doing it, especially vs a bigger guy or a good defender(either). because by the time he makes his move on a big guy. the help will come.

So this means magic is stuck running pick n rolls. thats not going to be nearly as successful as you think with these defenders on my team and the fact that we dont have to play rodman for the shot AT ALL. there's always someone covering the dribble drive or the pass to the lane. so it means the only thing thats open is the mid range jumper. a pick n pop. or a dribble drive kick out for 3. if its a dribble drive kick out for 3. there's only 2 guys you can do this with. sheed, and tmac. if sheed misses (which he will do during this year that he was chosen). thats less boarders on the offensive glass. therefore its one and done. now, that means if you're smart tmac is the guy taking that shot. now here's the deal. how are you going to get to the pass to tmac if eddie jones is sitting in the passing lane. because he NEVER has to help on penetration/a roller because pierce can just hang out whereever he wants because there is ZERO fear of rodman's jumper.

so because you allowed me to play zone. i can cheat like crazy. but you can't. because of the shooters i do have on my team and the mid range game i have on my team. in addiiton to the fact that you are double teaming downlow. something i'm not doing.

SO in essence your defense is extremely compromised. 1 by double teaming the low post. leaving webber, or pierce, or eddie, or gp wide open to do whatever they please. 2. you can't ever lock up anyone on the perimeter because you can't touch us. and the only perimeter DEFENDER you have his rodman. a lot of his defense had to do with him using his arms/hands body to ride people. just like how scottie lowed Magic. he road him, held him, etc. that wasn't legal then to be honest but lets assume it was. it for sure isn't legal now. you would be in serious foul trouble if you tried this. that means you can't lock up on anyone on my team and be successful. but i can stay at home on tmac so he can't receive kickouts for 3's. and i can also play him and watch him, magic shoot jumpers all game long. because we have pierce sitting there along with at least one big waiting for penetration.

its called a 5 on 4(dennis doesn't count on offense).

if he would've had a serious low post threat, i would understand losing. but that wasn't the case. it means you're giving magic to much credit. how many times did magic win big without a hall of fame sf and a hall of fame low post threat? never.

guess what he doesn't have offensively. a hall of fame sf(offensively) and a hall of fame low post threat(offensively).
game over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jamas33
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jun 2001
Posts: 3369
Location: Lake Minnetonka

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:46 pm    Post subject:

postandpivot wrote:
TIME wrote:
No need to go into all the detail postandpivot. All we needed to know you already opened our eyes to see earlier in the thread when you identified all five of your starters as unguardable by Sweden. It's obvious now that you should have blown jamas out of the arena. Blind judges.

well the truth is, because he chose that era. name one guy that could guard the other guy 1 on 1 in this new DONT TOUCH ERA?

Camby can't guard moses, thats why the double was a must

that leaves someone open? WHO? eddie, paulina, Gp, Cwebb(probably, because you want to have the help of a big, but it could be tmac or dennis the menace. but if you use either of those two, your eye will be dotted.

Jones: .375 3P%
Pierce: .392 3P%

Glen Rice shot .367 from 3 during our first ship with snaqs and kobe. if that was enough to make double teams pay. how on earth 2 guys shooting over that isn't? doesn't add up fellas.

let me show you guys something. look at paulina's 3pt numbers in the playoffs. they went down from during the season above. why? because he saw more man to man coverage then zone. because there was no one they had to double team in the low post(KG is a mid range killer, but not a low post beast, he could be but he isn't).

what would happen if pierce played with snaqs in his hay day? his 3pt% would sky rocket. we all know why. its the same here with moses. no moses aint shaq. BUT, if you're doubling moses like you say you are, then moses is shaq to you.
it means jones, pierce are wide open, it means cwebb is open. thats to many guys open. which means no no one on that team can defend anyone, because you're chosing not to. in addition, magic, tmac are not defenders. not saying eddie jones is some kobe bryant, but he doesn't have to be. tmac is not going to play him tough defensively. even with his length. how often have you seen tmac in his career use his length like prince on defense? NEVER probably.

so the idea of length on defense is irrelevant if its not use correctly.

and thats another assumption i saw that was totally incorrect. remember some of you guys are the same people who swear that LO's length isn't enough to get it done on defense with two legit Bigmen (gasol and bynum both footers officialy).
on offense to assume magic is running like an olympic relay is a bit much. magic ran with the purple and gold. but did he run ALL THE TIME? NO. he ran less then half the time. so what was he doing the rest of the time? posting people up, pick n roll(which you mentioned both), hitting guys off the cut. here's the problem. there was no team that was remotely this tough defensively that magic ever saw on the perimeter. eddie jones who is a passing lane menace as well as a solid on the ball defender, and gary who is an on the ball THief as well as a passing lane / thief. you can't post up gp if you've allowed us to run zone. thats why i wasn't talking about gp doing any real posting up on magic. not that he couldn't gp could post up anyone in the nba including centers from time to time, I've seen it . but in a zone i would not have him doing it, especially vs a bigger guy or a good defender(either). because by the time he makes his move on a big guy. the help will come.

So this means magic is stuck running pick n rolls. thats not going to be nearly as successful as you think with these defenders on my team and the fact that we dont have to play rodman for the shot AT ALL. there's always someone covering the dribble drive or the pass to the lane. so it means the only thing thats open is the mid range jumper. a pick n pop. or a dribble drive kick out for 3. if its a dribble drive kick out for 3. there's only 2 guys you can do this with. sheed, and tmac. if sheed misses (which he will do during this year that he was chosen). thats less boarders on the offensive glass. therefore its one and done. now, that means if you're smart tmac is the guy taking that shot. now here's the deal. how are you going to get to the pass to tmac if eddie jones is sitting in the passing lane. because he NEVER has to help on penetration/a roller because pierce can just hang out whereever he wants because there is ZERO fear of rodman's jumper.

so because you allowed me to play zone. i can cheat like crazy. but you can't. because of the shooters i do have on my team and the mid range game i have on my team. in addiiton to the fact that you are double teaming downlow. something i'm not doing.

SO in essence your defense is extremely compromised. 1 by double teaming the low post. leaving webber, or pierce, or eddie, or gp wide open to do whatever they please. 2. you can't ever lock up anyone on the perimeter because you can't touch us. and the only perimeter DEFENDER you have his rodman. a lot of his defense had to do with him using his arms/hands body to ride people. just like how scottie lowed Magic. he road him, held him, etc. that wasn't legal then to be honest but lets assume it was. it for sure isn't legal now. you would be in serious foul trouble if you tried this. that means you can't lock up on anyone on my team and be successful. but i can stay at home on tmac so he can't receive kickouts for 3's. and i can also play him and watch him, magic shoot jumpers all game long. because we have pierce sitting there along with at least one big waiting for penetration.

its called a 5 on 4(dennis doesn't count on offense).

if he would've had a serious low post threat, i would understand losing. but that wasn't the case. it means you're giving magic to much credit. how many times did magic win big without a hall of fame sf and a hall of fame low post threat? never.

guess what he doesn't have offensively. a hall of fame sf(offensively) and a hall of fame low post threat(offensively).
game over.
blah blah blah blah blah.. I should have won.. blah blah blah blah.. i should have won... blah blah blah blah.. the judges are wrong.. blah blah blah blah.. the other GM's are wrong... blah blah blah blah.. you all are wrong... blah blah blah blah... I should have won... blah blah blah blah...


This interpretation was a public service for all the other GM's, judges, participants and lurkers of the ALL TIME LEAGUE forum, was brought to you by www.sociopath.org




* Standard
* Distance
* A-Z

SORT BY:

1 - 25 of 162 businesses

*
Dr. Mike A. Seliktar

9107 Wilshire Blvd. Suite # 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 714-9557
Dr. Mike A. Seliktar logo
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info:
o Products & Services
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Weiss Diane MD

435 N Bedford Dr., Ste. 404
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 273-8448
Psychiatry & Psychotherapy
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info:
o Affiliations/Certifications/Licenses
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Addiction Alternatives

9171 Wilshire Blvd Suite 680
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 275-5433
o Visit Web Site
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info:
o Payment Methods
o Hours of Operation
o In Business Since
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Alegria Medical Group

9301 Wilshire Blvd
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 271-9880
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Analycs Inc.

436 N Roxbury Dr
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 273-0076
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Barth Jill Model Ph.D.

450 N Bedford Dr Ste 303b
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 550-8464
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info:
o Products & Services
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Brown Rhonda MFT

9171 Wilshire Blvd Ste 15
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 275-2565
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Burstyn Donna MFT

9615 Brighton Way
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 859-9007
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Clothier Ann MSW

9615 Brighton Way Ste 323
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 858-0123
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Cozolino Louis Ph.D.

360 N Bedford Dr Ste 312
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 273-6248
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
David Smiler MFT

9171 Wilshire Blvd Ste 680
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 247-0559
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Davis Susan M LCSW

416 N Bedford Dr Ste 208
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 274-2780
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
De George Franziska Ph.D.

450 N Bedford Dr
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 205-0655
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Franzblau Michael

435 N Bedford Dr Ste 305
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 276-6282
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Grapes Lori MFCC

9107 Wilshire Blvd Ste 301
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 273-9733
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Helfenstein Joan LCSW

360 N Bedford Dr Ste 412
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 278-8211
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Kaminsky Deborah MA

9107 Wilshire Blvd Ste 215
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 278-3027
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Kiriakos Carol R MD

9171 Wilshire Blvd Ste 5
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 271-8422
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Kushnet Judith MFCC

435 N Bedford Dr Ste 408
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 247-9340
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Land Colleen Psychotherapist

412 Foothill Rd
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 887-0553
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Lloyd Jan R MFCC

436 N Roxbury Dr Ste 209
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 276-7655
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Machtinger Paula-LCSW

916 N Crescent Dr
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
o (310) 276-5221
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o More Info
o E-mail It
o Search Nearby
*
Parents Support Group

490 Foothill Rd
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 246-1601
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Piontak Beverly J MFCC

435 N Bedford Dr Ste 401
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (310) 275-2776
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby
*
Rebecca Roy M.A.

9171 Wilshire Blvd Suite 670
Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Map
o (954) 334-8283
Gray StarGray StarGray StarGray StarGray Star

o
o Read Reviews
o Map It
o E-mail It
o Get Directions
o Search Nearby

* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
* Next
* Last

Page 1 of 7
ALSO IN YOUR AREA

Dr. Mike A. Seliktar
Dr. Mike A. Seliktar logo
9107 Wilshire Blvd. Suite # 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
(310) 714-9557
More Info

Dr. Lori Perman, PSY. D., LMFT
Dr. Lori Perman, PSY. D., LMFT logo
1452 26th St. Ste. 101
Santa Monica, CA 90404
(310) 458-1310
More Info

Charters Mychelle, LCSW
Charters Mychelle, LCSW logo
Serving Your Area
(310) 746-7894
More Info

Ginne, Licia MFT
3201 Willshire Blvd Ste 209
Santa Monica, CA 90403
(310) 828-1256
More Info | Web Site

Southern California Counseling Center
5615 W Pico Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90019
(323) 937-1344
More Info | Web Site

Weiss Diane MD
435 N Bedford Dr., Ste. 404
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
(310) 273-8448
More Info
_________________
Want Some Pancakes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Sky
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:55 pm    Post subject:

Pivot has the final word.

He raises great points and they are definitely worth reading. But they are paired with his steadfast refusal to hold himself accountable and that tactic gets tired after a while. A while has arrived. So to quote Barack Obama, enough. This thread dies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> All-Time League All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB